An excellent history for context Nurit. I would add a few other pieces of information for those who don't know.
1. At the end of the 1948 War some 700,000 Palestinians were displaced from the territory that became Israel. Shortly thereafter some 900,000 Jews from various Middle Eastern Countries were expelled because of events in that war and forced to flee to Israel. The nearly 1:1 exchange of populations should have been the basis for ending all claims for "Right to Return" on both sides.
2. Israel allows Palestinians to live and be citizens of Israel. The same is NOT true of the Palestinians under Hamas or the Palestinian Authority which insist that their state must be Jew Free (Judenrhein). As such, this makes clear which side is NOT open to tolerance and co-existence and why a one state solution of a united Israeli-Palestinian state is impossible.
3. Israel has made and maintained peace with Egypt and Jordan demonstrating that they are capable of being a partner in peace. The Palestinians have destroyed every place they live with conflict ruining Lebanon, destabilizing Syria and Jordan and turning Gaza and the West Bank into rocket launching platforms rather than peaceful states living alongside Israel.
4. With Gaza being independent under Palestinian Authority and then Hamas rule, the residents of Gaza had an independent state. That state's lawfully elected government engaged in a genocidal war against Israel this month. It is entirely appropriate that the losing party in this war forfeit territory as a means to avoid future ability to renew that war in the future. The Palestinian state of Gaza has been judged and found incompatible with peace. It's people no longer have any claim to continued residence in the region.
Thanks! I mentioned some of these topics in the appendix. I didn't want to make it too long so obviously I skipped many details.
Re. 1 - I am pretty sure most Mizrahi Israelis don't really want to move back to their countries of origin... but in many cases they had to sign over their property to the government in order to leave. I don't believe they'll ever get it back.
Re. 2 - A one state solution is not possible, IMO, for a number of reasons, not the least of which - if we don't get along when we're not in the same state, how are we supposed to get along in the same state? I also think the "one state solution" proposed by the Israeli far right - annexing the West Bank but leaving the Palestinian stateless, is morally wrong and is bound to backfire. This is why the 2-state solution is the only moral one (albeit also not very feasible). An Israeli journalist recently called it "an amicable divorce". Oh, and fun fact: The vast majority of Israeli Arabs would prefer to stay Israeli even if there was a Palestinian state. They may not be very happy with the Israeli government and with being a minority in a Jewish state, but they are not stupid.
Re. 3 - no Arab country wants to take in the Palestinians. Even now, when Israel asks Gaza residents to move South, the Egyptians shut the border crossing.
Re. 4 - another point that I didn't mention (again, I didn't want to make it too long). There is a profound difference between the Hamas and the Fatah that rules the West Bank. Fatah is secular, and Hamas is a fundamentalist Islamic movement. Israel helped build Hamas to fight the Fatah, making exactly the same mistake the US did with the Taliban and the Ayatollahs. I don't know what they were thinking when they empowered a batshit crazy fundamentalist organization to fight a hostile secular regime.
I agree. The reason I mention point 1 is to remind readers that the Palestinians were not the only people displaced by the Palestinian decision NOT to peacefully accept the partition of the Palestinian mandate. (It should also be noted that the Arabs received 94% of the whole mandate.) A good comparison can and should be made with another mass displacement of civilians by war in that era. The German defeat at the end of World War II resulted in the displacement of the German civilian populations from Silesia and Prussia and the annexation of these lands by Poland. These territories had been populated by Germans going back to nearly Roman times...but were erased because of the war crimes and military defeat of the German state at the end of the war. Like the Palestinians of 1948, the actions of their own leaders led to the catastrophe forcing their expulsion regardless of the individual culpability of those expelled. Unlike the Palestinians who have engaged in 75 years of war to try to reverse the loss of some territory, the Germans displaced into a smaller Rump Germany spent their efforts rebuilding their society into a model peace loving democratic state. They endured 10 years of occupation in the Western half of old Germany and defacto 45 years of occupation in the occupied quarter that the Russians occupied (DDR = East Germany). At the end of the Cold War when the now powerful German state had the opportunity to reunify East and West Germany, a serious question remained. What about the territories lost to Poland and Russia...Silesia and Prussia? Instead of using its power to bully Poland and Russia into giving back some or all of those territories or insisting on a "right of return" for the descendants of those displaced, the Germany state officially renounced all claims to those lands and accepted the judgement of history. That decision maintained the peace in Europe at that time and prevents war between the Rivers Oder and Memel (Poland/Lithuania). If the Palestinians had followed the path of the Germans imagine the vibrant Palestinian state that would exist today alongside prosperous states in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and, of course Israel. That the Palestinians and their supporters still haven't learned from history is perhaps the greatest tragedy of all.
The Germans were and are part of the Western world. Nazism was a peculiarly Western cancer, born of Western philosophies and history. Germany, a nation state (although a late one) with centuries of history towards modernity, was able to reason rationally about the pro and cons of territorial claims after decades, and chose what would keep it inside the European consensus (this does not mean that there are not those, on the German far right, who dream to cross the Oder again -- but the times of territorial disputes in Western Europe seem past). Also, Germany underwent several decades of intense but not violent pressure to change, accompanied by that incredibly brilliant policy that was the Marshall Plan. The problems that Germany has had after the reunification, namely the rise of a strong far-right, often neo-nazi opposition mostly from former East Germany Lander, highlights the difference that policies make.
The Palestinian Arabs, on the other hand, are a completely different matter. The very concept of nation states was mostly unknown to the Middle East until fairly recently. Most nation states there were created after WWI by the need of the victorious Allied Powers and the ensuing League of Nations to deal with recognisable state structures. The Turks were the only ones that had advanced to almost nation state (but not the whole Ottoman Empire), and in a measure Egypt. The rest, even Persia, was a number of territorial entities ruled by tribes almost constantly engaged in in-fighting, whose power rose and fell and determined the choices (and often the fate) of what kings, princes and overlords they had.
It is not a judgement of value, it is simply the acknowledgement of a system of government and a very idea of statehood, based on familial ties and clan ties, with no true concept of a super partes state entity (except religious structure), that is completely different from the one developed in the West with the Industrial Revolution.
In this context, it is difficult to see the state of things as a Palestinian failure to learn from history -- aside from the fact that the very concept of history is different in a worldview informed by religion to the extent that religious fundamentalist worldviews are. If the Palestinian people had not been swept into religious fundamentalism, if the secular element of Fatah had not been ruthlessly massacred by Hamas, perhaps that lesson would have been available for learning. As it is, it would have taken a miracle of those that rarely happen.
And mind, the governments of Israel bear no little responsibility in having hampered that process after the Oslo accords by caving in, mostly to remain in power, to the demands of that part of Zionism that wants the entirety of old Mandate Palestine to be part of Israel. All of us bear responsibility.
None of it is a justification for the deliberate massacre of civilians. Most of the world has seen the true face of Hamas, now, and we have seen the true face of those to the left that are drunk on postmodern nihilism. Hopefully we'll take notice and remember.
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
True. As in the Arab world, the concept of the modern nation state only came to Germany and Italy in the mid 1800's whereas the Arab world is likely 100-150 years behind on that process. This raises a significant points regarding how best to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is clearly a nation state and is able to function peacefully as such with like minded neighbors. The Palestinians, despite their demands for a state, clearly are not yet ready for statehood. I do not say this to be patronizing or demeaning, but the reality as demonstrated by the PA and Hamas leadership is neither is prepared to govern the Palestinians as a nation and to interact as a nation state with their neighbors. A people with a nation state have to be prepared to take responsibility for the actions of that state. The Germans demonstrated that after 1945. The various new nations of eastern Europe have more or less done the same in that time period. Egypt and surprisingly Jordan have done so in the Middle East. The Palestinians have not...and it is NOT for lack of massive input resources to help them rebuild after each of the wars THEY started. This makes resolving the problem far more difficult as Israel has no functional partner to negotiate with or hold accountable. It is all truly tragic.
Unfortunately Israel has not presented itself in the best light either. In recent years Israel has had a far right government that doubles down on continuing to expand the settlements and shows no real interest in peace. I say it with a lot of pain and anger, but it looks like neither Netanyahu nor Abu Mazen wants a long term solution because it serves their interests.
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
The writer of this post and I live in two different worlds, and remember two completely different versions of the recent past.
As I remember 9/11, the Left in the United States was indeed horrified by the terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, but it immediately raised the issue of why educated Arabs with promising careers in engineering would commit suicide: it was in order to answer that question that the President of the U.S. had to claim -- this couldn't have been more prominent -- "they hate us for our freedoms".
The Left in the United States did not want the U.S. to invade Afghanistan, let alone Iraq; it wanted the terrorist organizers of 9/11 to be hunted, captured, and put on trial. It responded to the call for a "War on Terror", that it is impossible to declare war on a tactic. It asked the United States to contemplate why its decades of bombing and intervention abroad inspired the terrorists to attack civilians inside the U.S.
And it is doing the exact same thing with the Hamas attack last week.
The Left is perfectly consistent. It is the Imperialist corporate Establishment that considers Arab and Palestinian deaths to be valueless, but American and Israeli deaths invaluable.
You live in a different world than many people. The "imperialist corporate establishment". Sure. Also UFOs and Cultural Marxism. The Iranian regime is also a creation of American imperialism, I am certain, not to speak of Islamic Brotherhood (est. 1928), Hamas (est. 1978), Hezbollah (est. 1982), and why not, tsunamis and earthquakes. The world is much, much more complex than your ideological conspiracy theories, my friend, but continue to hold on to them tight and never, never pause to think.
Thank goodness there is more than one Left, and the far-left, although vocal, is not the majority. But the pampered murder-cheering children and their ideologues are disgusting.
To mention the thousands of deaths of Palestinians in Gaza in the same breath with the thousands of deaths of Israelis last week is, I see, to be a murder-cheering child.
It is not name calling. They are mostly young and they cheered murder -- in all these pro-Palestine demonstrations that came up in campuses, right after a deliberate massacre of civilians, to support those who had massacred the civilians. Not a word, from those who spoke, to distinguish between Hamas and the Palestinian people (most of whom are used by Hamas as human shields); as if what Hamas did were a spontaneous rebellion of the oppressed that got out of hand. So the chants, up to "Gas the Jews". So the lovely paraglider meme.
Unfortunately the deflection and denial tactic does not work in the age of cellphone recording. None of this people took to the stage to say, "This is terrible, hatred has to stop, find a solution, work for peace." They said, "Go! this is what liberation looks like, continue it until Israel is wiped out!"
You may be willingly deaf and blind. I, and others, chose not to be. And if I do not call them murder-cheering children I will have to call them abettors to a crime against humanity.
I will agree that you, Ulysses, did not call me a murder-cheering child, and that there do exist murder-cheering children among the protesters of the Israeli attack on Gaza.
If that is the basis for our disagreement, then it is a false one.
No, I am objecting to the history presented in the post -- that there was unified agreement, all across the Left, that we had to go and bomb those nefarious Arabs who took down the World Trade Center, while there is no such agreement, to the contrary, there's explanations offered for the actions, regarding the Hamas terrorists of last week.
The Left of which I am a member remembers marches, in the streets, by the thousands, tens of thousands, and hundreds of thousands, all across the United States and Europe, protesting the coming attack by George Dubya against Iraq.
For the second time today I have to eat crow, Nurit. Your post reference to 9/11 did not say that those who supported military action against the criminals who committed 9/11 were now opposed to military action following the terrorism of last week. What you said was, and what I take issue with, was that "Apparently Israel is the only country in the world who is to blame when its own citizens are brutally murdered."
The United States had bombed and murdered a multitude of Arab civilians -- intervening in Lebanon, Somalia, and elsewhere, although we certainly committed the same crimes by many orders of magnitude more, after 9/11 -- and people who did point that out were taken off the air in the buildup to our invasion of Iraq.
The point of your essay, however, was not that passing remark. Your case of hypocrisy is thereby weakened, however. The "decolonization" people always condemned Israel; they didn't support some cause for one side and then forget about it when Israel was attacked, they always condemned Israeli actions against the Palestinians.
So no, you did not accuse -- and I apologize. I am sorry I took issue with your statement as accusing the Left of failing to condemn U.S. actions against al-Qaeda while condemning Israeli action against Hamas. You did not make that argument.
You simply said that "decolonization" spoke of "social justice" while supporting terrorism. That's factual and true.
Wokeism, like many if not all religions, tells a simplistic yet emotionally inspiring story, which is why people believe:
“Once upon a time, there were good, loving, and peaceful POCs who lived in harmony with each other and nature. Until one day, the Evil White Man arrived on their shores and murdered, enslaved, and oppressed them all! After years of suffering exclusively at the hands of the Evil White Man, the peaceful POCs are now finally fighting back for Justice. May they prevail!”
After hearing this story, many listeners literally experience rapture and tears. Apparently, cold logic and dull historical facts don’t inspire the same sort of fervor.
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
Any why is the UN Chief standing up for Truck Aid for Gazans but not standing up for Hostage Release of Israelis? Again, we are unfortunately observing those double-standards of antisemitism.
I'll offer some hopeful commentary regarding your question about how it can end (at least in the meantime).
It's important that intelligent neutral Academics encourage the opening of the Rafah Crossing: Anyone who supports the pursuit of innocent Gazans for "Land, Life, and Freedom" must understand that they will not achieve any of these in a place that has a population density on the order of a thousand people in a squared kilometer.
Once innocent Gazans reach Cairo, they can readily reconnect with their Arabian heritage: There is plenty of "Land, Energy, and Money" across the Peninsula.
Egypt does not want them. Jordan does not want them. The Arab states that fear to be overrun by the Islamist tide, be it Sunni or Shiite, do not want the Palestinians on their territory, because they fear contamination.
The one option is a Palestinian state on West Bank and Gaza, governed by secular Fatah, and support to Fatah. It is unlikely that a Palestinian state would make Israel less secure than it is, but it would make things and actions much, much clearer.
Don't idolize Fatah. They, together with other secular organizations, are responsible for plenty of terror attacks, especially in Israel's formative years.
Let's just patiently wait. I have a feeling that many Palestinians will eventually find a home in Egypt, as well as in wealthy countries with a modest population density.
An excellent history for context Nurit. I would add a few other pieces of information for those who don't know.
1. At the end of the 1948 War some 700,000 Palestinians were displaced from the territory that became Israel. Shortly thereafter some 900,000 Jews from various Middle Eastern Countries were expelled because of events in that war and forced to flee to Israel. The nearly 1:1 exchange of populations should have been the basis for ending all claims for "Right to Return" on both sides.
2. Israel allows Palestinians to live and be citizens of Israel. The same is NOT true of the Palestinians under Hamas or the Palestinian Authority which insist that their state must be Jew Free (Judenrhein). As such, this makes clear which side is NOT open to tolerance and co-existence and why a one state solution of a united Israeli-Palestinian state is impossible.
3. Israel has made and maintained peace with Egypt and Jordan demonstrating that they are capable of being a partner in peace. The Palestinians have destroyed every place they live with conflict ruining Lebanon, destabilizing Syria and Jordan and turning Gaza and the West Bank into rocket launching platforms rather than peaceful states living alongside Israel.
4. With Gaza being independent under Palestinian Authority and then Hamas rule, the residents of Gaza had an independent state. That state's lawfully elected government engaged in a genocidal war against Israel this month. It is entirely appropriate that the losing party in this war forfeit territory as a means to avoid future ability to renew that war in the future. The Palestinian state of Gaza has been judged and found incompatible with peace. It's people no longer have any claim to continued residence in the region.
Thanks! I mentioned some of these topics in the appendix. I didn't want to make it too long so obviously I skipped many details.
Re. 1 - I am pretty sure most Mizrahi Israelis don't really want to move back to their countries of origin... but in many cases they had to sign over their property to the government in order to leave. I don't believe they'll ever get it back.
Re. 2 - A one state solution is not possible, IMO, for a number of reasons, not the least of which - if we don't get along when we're not in the same state, how are we supposed to get along in the same state? I also think the "one state solution" proposed by the Israeli far right - annexing the West Bank but leaving the Palestinian stateless, is morally wrong and is bound to backfire. This is why the 2-state solution is the only moral one (albeit also not very feasible). An Israeli journalist recently called it "an amicable divorce". Oh, and fun fact: The vast majority of Israeli Arabs would prefer to stay Israeli even if there was a Palestinian state. They may not be very happy with the Israeli government and with being a minority in a Jewish state, but they are not stupid.
Re. 3 - no Arab country wants to take in the Palestinians. Even now, when Israel asks Gaza residents to move South, the Egyptians shut the border crossing.
Re. 4 - another point that I didn't mention (again, I didn't want to make it too long). There is a profound difference between the Hamas and the Fatah that rules the West Bank. Fatah is secular, and Hamas is a fundamentalist Islamic movement. Israel helped build Hamas to fight the Fatah, making exactly the same mistake the US did with the Taliban and the Ayatollahs. I don't know what they were thinking when they empowered a batshit crazy fundamentalist organization to fight a hostile secular regime.
I agree. The reason I mention point 1 is to remind readers that the Palestinians were not the only people displaced by the Palestinian decision NOT to peacefully accept the partition of the Palestinian mandate. (It should also be noted that the Arabs received 94% of the whole mandate.) A good comparison can and should be made with another mass displacement of civilians by war in that era. The German defeat at the end of World War II resulted in the displacement of the German civilian populations from Silesia and Prussia and the annexation of these lands by Poland. These territories had been populated by Germans going back to nearly Roman times...but were erased because of the war crimes and military defeat of the German state at the end of the war. Like the Palestinians of 1948, the actions of their own leaders led to the catastrophe forcing their expulsion regardless of the individual culpability of those expelled. Unlike the Palestinians who have engaged in 75 years of war to try to reverse the loss of some territory, the Germans displaced into a smaller Rump Germany spent their efforts rebuilding their society into a model peace loving democratic state. They endured 10 years of occupation in the Western half of old Germany and defacto 45 years of occupation in the occupied quarter that the Russians occupied (DDR = East Germany). At the end of the Cold War when the now powerful German state had the opportunity to reunify East and West Germany, a serious question remained. What about the territories lost to Poland and Russia...Silesia and Prussia? Instead of using its power to bully Poland and Russia into giving back some or all of those territories or insisting on a "right of return" for the descendants of those displaced, the Germany state officially renounced all claims to those lands and accepted the judgement of history. That decision maintained the peace in Europe at that time and prevents war between the Rivers Oder and Memel (Poland/Lithuania). If the Palestinians had followed the path of the Germans imagine the vibrant Palestinian state that would exist today alongside prosperous states in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and, of course Israel. That the Palestinians and their supporters still haven't learned from history is perhaps the greatest tragedy of all.
The Germans were and are part of the Western world. Nazism was a peculiarly Western cancer, born of Western philosophies and history. Germany, a nation state (although a late one) with centuries of history towards modernity, was able to reason rationally about the pro and cons of territorial claims after decades, and chose what would keep it inside the European consensus (this does not mean that there are not those, on the German far right, who dream to cross the Oder again -- but the times of territorial disputes in Western Europe seem past). Also, Germany underwent several decades of intense but not violent pressure to change, accompanied by that incredibly brilliant policy that was the Marshall Plan. The problems that Germany has had after the reunification, namely the rise of a strong far-right, often neo-nazi opposition mostly from former East Germany Lander, highlights the difference that policies make.
The Palestinian Arabs, on the other hand, are a completely different matter. The very concept of nation states was mostly unknown to the Middle East until fairly recently. Most nation states there were created after WWI by the need of the victorious Allied Powers and the ensuing League of Nations to deal with recognisable state structures. The Turks were the only ones that had advanced to almost nation state (but not the whole Ottoman Empire), and in a measure Egypt. The rest, even Persia, was a number of territorial entities ruled by tribes almost constantly engaged in in-fighting, whose power rose and fell and determined the choices (and often the fate) of what kings, princes and overlords they had.
It is not a judgement of value, it is simply the acknowledgement of a system of government and a very idea of statehood, based on familial ties and clan ties, with no true concept of a super partes state entity (except religious structure), that is completely different from the one developed in the West with the Industrial Revolution.
In this context, it is difficult to see the state of things as a Palestinian failure to learn from history -- aside from the fact that the very concept of history is different in a worldview informed by religion to the extent that religious fundamentalist worldviews are. If the Palestinian people had not been swept into religious fundamentalism, if the secular element of Fatah had not been ruthlessly massacred by Hamas, perhaps that lesson would have been available for learning. As it is, it would have taken a miracle of those that rarely happen.
And mind, the governments of Israel bear no little responsibility in having hampered that process after the Oslo accords by caving in, mostly to remain in power, to the demands of that part of Zionism that wants the entirety of old Mandate Palestine to be part of Israel. All of us bear responsibility.
None of it is a justification for the deliberate massacre of civilians. Most of the world has seen the true face of Hamas, now, and we have seen the true face of those to the left that are drunk on postmodern nihilism. Hopefully we'll take notice and remember.
OPEN BORDERS FOR ISRAEL . . . BECAUSE IT IS ONLY FAIR . . .
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/03/sweden-jews-call-for-ban-on-nordic-resistance-movement/
Precisely the article that needed to be written.
True. As in the Arab world, the concept of the modern nation state only came to Germany and Italy in the mid 1800's whereas the Arab world is likely 100-150 years behind on that process. This raises a significant points regarding how best to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is clearly a nation state and is able to function peacefully as such with like minded neighbors. The Palestinians, despite their demands for a state, clearly are not yet ready for statehood. I do not say this to be patronizing or demeaning, but the reality as demonstrated by the PA and Hamas leadership is neither is prepared to govern the Palestinians as a nation and to interact as a nation state with their neighbors. A people with a nation state have to be prepared to take responsibility for the actions of that state. The Germans demonstrated that after 1945. The various new nations of eastern Europe have more or less done the same in that time period. Egypt and surprisingly Jordan have done so in the Middle East. The Palestinians have not...and it is NOT for lack of massive input resources to help them rebuild after each of the wars THEY started. This makes resolving the problem far more difficult as Israel has no functional partner to negotiate with or hold accountable. It is all truly tragic.
Unfortunately Israel has not presented itself in the best light either. In recent years Israel has had a far right government that doubles down on continuing to expand the settlements and shows no real interest in peace. I say it with a lot of pain and anger, but it looks like neither Netanyahu nor Abu Mazen wants a long term solution because it serves their interests.
OPEN BORDERS FOR ISRAEL . . . BECAUSE IT IS ONLY FAIR . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/03/sweden-jews-call-for-ban-on-nordic-resistance-movement/
This is an excellent article. I'm especially impressed by the historical analysis of the appendix.
Kol HaKavod!
תודה!
I just got sick of all the ignorance, you know.
The party line of the woke left is inconsistent and of course they are guilty of hypocrisy.
Good piece.
Thanks!
They are very consistent about their anti-Israel stance, though.
Yep.
“Woke,” “wokeism,” “wokeness,” etc., are deceptive nomenclatures for concealing the truth about the Jews and the Frankfurt School . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/how-the-grift-right-gimps-for-the
The writer of this post and I live in two different worlds, and remember two completely different versions of the recent past.
As I remember 9/11, the Left in the United States was indeed horrified by the terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, but it immediately raised the issue of why educated Arabs with promising careers in engineering would commit suicide: it was in order to answer that question that the President of the U.S. had to claim -- this couldn't have been more prominent -- "they hate us for our freedoms".
The Left in the United States did not want the U.S. to invade Afghanistan, let alone Iraq; it wanted the terrorist organizers of 9/11 to be hunted, captured, and put on trial. It responded to the call for a "War on Terror", that it is impossible to declare war on a tactic. It asked the United States to contemplate why its decades of bombing and intervention abroad inspired the terrorists to attack civilians inside the U.S.
And it is doing the exact same thing with the Hamas attack last week.
The Left is perfectly consistent. It is the Imperialist corporate Establishment that considers Arab and Palestinian deaths to be valueless, but American and Israeli deaths invaluable.
You live in a different world than many people. The "imperialist corporate establishment". Sure. Also UFOs and Cultural Marxism. The Iranian regime is also a creation of American imperialism, I am certain, not to speak of Islamic Brotherhood (est. 1928), Hamas (est. 1978), Hezbollah (est. 1982), and why not, tsunamis and earthquakes. The world is much, much more complex than your ideological conspiracy theories, my friend, but continue to hold on to them tight and never, never pause to think.
Thank goodness there is more than one Left, and the far-left, although vocal, is not the majority. But the pampered murder-cheering children and their ideologues are disgusting.
To mention the thousands of deaths of Palestinians in Gaza in the same breath with the thousands of deaths of Israelis last week is, I see, to be a murder-cheering child.
Name-calling is not an argument.
But you know that.
It just doesn't stop you.
It is not name calling. They are mostly young and they cheered murder -- in all these pro-Palestine demonstrations that came up in campuses, right after a deliberate massacre of civilians, to support those who had massacred the civilians. Not a word, from those who spoke, to distinguish between Hamas and the Palestinian people (most of whom are used by Hamas as human shields); as if what Hamas did were a spontaneous rebellion of the oppressed that got out of hand. So the chants, up to "Gas the Jews". So the lovely paraglider meme.
Unfortunately the deflection and denial tactic does not work in the age of cellphone recording. None of this people took to the stage to say, "This is terrible, hatred has to stop, find a solution, work for peace." They said, "Go! this is what liberation looks like, continue it until Israel is wiped out!"
You may be willingly deaf and blind. I, and others, chose not to be. And if I do not call them murder-cheering children I will have to call them abettors to a crime against humanity.
I prefer to consider them stupid than evil.
I will agree that you, Ulysses, did not call me a murder-cheering child, and that there do exist murder-cheering children among the protesters of the Israeli attack on Gaza.
If that is the basis for our disagreement, then it is a false one.
No, I am objecting to the history presented in the post -- that there was unified agreement, all across the Left, that we had to go and bomb those nefarious Arabs who took down the World Trade Center, while there is no such agreement, to the contrary, there's explanations offered for the actions, regarding the Hamas terrorists of last week.
The Left of which I am a member remembers marches, in the streets, by the thousands, tens of thousands, and hundreds of thousands, all across the United States and Europe, protesting the coming attack by George Dubya against Iraq.
The poster doesn't remember that.
What?! What in my post made you think that the Left said we had to go and bomb anything? Where did I ever say that?! Did you even read what I wrote?
For the second time today I have to eat crow, Nurit. Your post reference to 9/11 did not say that those who supported military action against the criminals who committed 9/11 were now opposed to military action following the terrorism of last week. What you said was, and what I take issue with, was that "Apparently Israel is the only country in the world who is to blame when its own citizens are brutally murdered."
The United States had bombed and murdered a multitude of Arab civilians -- intervening in Lebanon, Somalia, and elsewhere, although we certainly committed the same crimes by many orders of magnitude more, after 9/11 -- and people who did point that out were taken off the air in the buildup to our invasion of Iraq.
The point of your essay, however, was not that passing remark. Your case of hypocrisy is thereby weakened, however. The "decolonization" people always condemned Israel; they didn't support some cause for one side and then forget about it when Israel was attacked, they always condemned Israeli actions against the Palestinians.
So no, you did not accuse -- and I apologize. I am sorry I took issue with your statement as accusing the Left of failing to condemn U.S. actions against al-Qaeda while condemning Israeli action against Hamas. You did not make that argument.
You simply said that "decolonization" spoke of "social justice" while supporting terrorism. That's factual and true.
Wokeism, like many if not all religions, tells a simplistic yet emotionally inspiring story, which is why people believe:
“Once upon a time, there were good, loving, and peaceful POCs who lived in harmony with each other and nature. Until one day, the Evil White Man arrived on their shores and murdered, enslaved, and oppressed them all! After years of suffering exclusively at the hands of the Evil White Man, the peaceful POCs are now finally fighting back for Justice. May they prevail!”
After hearing this story, many listeners literally experience rapture and tears. Apparently, cold logic and dull historical facts don’t inspire the same sort of fervor.
OPEN BORDERS FOR ISRAEL . . . BECAUSE IT IS ONLY FAIR . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Sweden: Jews Call for Ban on Nordic Resistance Movement . . .
❝I ALWAYS LIKE to take note of Jewish organisations calling for bans on immigration resistance parties. You could say “Why bother? We’re surrounded by Jews screeching for White Genocide in various, usually artfully disguised, ways. This is just another twig on the bonfire.”
This is true. But arguments about the JQ and its relationship to White minoritization are open to various kinds of objection. You can quote this or that Jewish journalist calling for open borders or abolishing White people. Objection? “It’s just one guy; no proof he’s representative of anything other than himself; besides, he’s making a legitimate argument that’s open to democratic debate.”
That is why calls for bans on political parties assume a special moral significance. It’s a demand for the suppression of debate. And when it comes from an organization that claims to be representative of Jewry, and that claim goes unchallenged, then a special moral culpability attaches to the Jews.❞
https://nationalvanguard.org/2019/03/sweden-jews-call-for-ban-on-nordic-resistance-movement/
Any why is the UN Chief standing up for Truck Aid for Gazans but not standing up for Hostage Release of Israelis? Again, we are unfortunately observing those double-standards of antisemitism.
The cast of employees of the UN is quite surprising.
This is true Nurit, thank you
I'll offer some hopeful commentary regarding your question about how it can end (at least in the meantime).
It's important that intelligent neutral Academics encourage the opening of the Rafah Crossing: Anyone who supports the pursuit of innocent Gazans for "Land, Life, and Freedom" must understand that they will not achieve any of these in a place that has a population density on the order of a thousand people in a squared kilometer.
Once innocent Gazans reach Cairo, they can readily reconnect with their Arabian heritage: There is plenty of "Land, Energy, and Money" across the Peninsula.
Egypt does not want them. Jordan does not want them. The Arab states that fear to be overrun by the Islamist tide, be it Sunni or Shiite, do not want the Palestinians on their territory, because they fear contamination.
The one option is a Palestinian state on West Bank and Gaza, governed by secular Fatah, and support to Fatah. It is unlikely that a Palestinian state would make Israel less secure than it is, but it would make things and actions much, much clearer.
Don't idolize Fatah. They, together with other secular organizations, are responsible for plenty of terror attacks, especially in Israel's formative years.
Let's just patiently wait. I have a feeling that many Palestinians will eventually find a home in Egypt, as well as in wealthy countries with a modest population density.